stock_margin_bse

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds the return type pandas.DataFrame but does not disclose any potential quirks, such as whether data is available for all historical dates or whether the summary includes multiple rows per date. This is acceptable for a simple read tool but adds limited behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is compact, with the main purpose stated in the first line and a structured docstring for parameters and return type. It avoids unnecessary elaboration, though the docstring could be seen as somewhat repetitive given the title.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a single-parameter data retrieval tool with strong annotations, the description is minimally adequate. However, there is no output schema, and the description does not list the columns or structure of the returned DataFrame, nor provide an example call. An agent would need to infer data granularity and date handling from the default value.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has one 'date' parameter with zero description, but the docstring clarifies it is a trading day (交易日). It does not specify the expected format (though the default '20260721' implies YYYYMMDD) or any constraints. The description partially compensates for the schema's lack of documentation, but not fully.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly identifies the tool as retrieving Beijing Stock Exchange margin trading summary data, with the title and first line specifying '融资融券汇总'. The name and description together distinguish it from related siblings like stock_margin_detail_bse (detail) and other exchange-specific margin tools, though it lacks an explicit verb like 'retrieve'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool instead of alternatives. No mention of related tools such as stock_margin_detail_bse or stock_margin_sse, nor any context about typical use cases. The description only implies a single-date query without explaining how the date should be formatted or what happens if it's invalid.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.